To Kill, or Not to Kill

I've always been a diehard pro-capital punishment kind of guy--at least, until recently. It seems as I grow older, I become more torn between what I know is morally acceptable, and what actually works in the real world. Let me explain:

I consider the death penalty a biblical institution and wholly just when applied in the correct manner. Not for the sake of vengeance or deterrence do I hold this view, but rather because it was ordained by God. If man is made in the image of God, murder is one of the ugliest sins imaginable. True justice cannot be served, unless the murderer's life is forfeit. Society must send this message to evil-doers, loud and clear. Any deterrent effect is just an added bonus.

So in short, I have no moral qualms about the death penalty as an institution. Nor will I lose sleep when a child molester or killer is executed.

But then I turn and see the utter decomposition of our judicial (none dare call it "justice" with a straight face) system. Time and time again, I read about the horrors of pervasive, systemic corruption in our courts, both in small matters, and those of great import. I drew the conclusion quite some time ago that the system as it functions, currently, is just a money-making racket and a complete sham.

So the questions arise: Do we place the power of life and death in dirty hands? Do we continue investing such control in people who have proven disinterested in--or downright hostile to--the notion of justice? Is making an impartial and factual determination of guilt or innocence within the scope of our courts' abilities, as they stand? If not, how do we resolve this painful dilemma?

I consider failure in executing a murderer a breach of justice; but an even greater injustice, in my opinion, is putting to death a person who is blameless.

The only solution I see, for the nonce, is limiting capital punishment's use to cases in which the perpetrator's guilt is not in question. For example, he is caught in the act by the authorities, or several parties can attest to having witnessed his barbarities, or the criminal demonstrably confesses his crime without compulsion. Another option is a complete overhaul and slash-and-burn policy within our judicial system, with built-in accountability. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening, any time soon.

I realize these scenarios aren't foolproof, and as I said, I'm torn. My opinion isn't set in stone, on this matter.

I welcome your comments.